Alternative Energy Vehicle Route Assignment by Wear-and-Tear Rating

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Fleet operators face challenges in transferring operational experience from gasoline vehicles to alternative energy vehicles, particularly in vehicle maintenance and repairs, due to differences in oil change schedules and engine repair requirements.

Innovation Solution

A system and method for assigning travel routes to alternative energy vehicles based on wear-and-tear ratings, considering factors like road grade, travel speed, electric motor use, and battery use, to minimize further wear-and-tear and optimize vehicle utilization.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If traditional gasoline vehicle maintenance schedules are applied to alternative energy vehicles, then operational experience can be transferred, but maintenance effectiveness deteriorates due to inapplicable oil change schedules and engine repair requirements

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetransferability of operational experienceVSAvoidmaintenance effectiveness
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent changes the maintenance parameters from gasoline-engine-based schedules to alternative energy vehicle-specific schedules. The system determines wear-and-tear ratings based on alternative energy vehicle operations (electric motor use, battery use, road grade, travel speed) rather than applying traditional gasoline vehicle parameters like oil change intervals and engine repair schedules.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Productivity

If alternative energy vehicles are assigned routes without considering wear-and-tear factors, then fleet operational flexibility is maintained, but vehicle lifespan deteriorates due to excessive wear-and-tear

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvefleet operational flexibilityVSAvoidvehicle lifespan
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDuration of action of stationary object

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary determination of wear-and-tear ratings for multiple potential travel routes before assigning a route to the vehicle. By evaluating the wear-and-tear impact of each route in advance (considering electric motor use, battery use, road grade, and travel speed), the system can select routes that balance operational needs with vehicle lifespan extension.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements feedback by continuously monitoring actual wear-and-tear experienced by the vehicle during operations and comparing it with predicted wear-and-tear ratings. This feedback loop allows the system to refine future route assignments and improve the accuracy of wear-and-tear predictions, thereby extending vehicle lifespan while maintaining operational flexibility.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

3Duration of action of stationary object

If routes are assigned to minimize wear-and-tear on alternative energy vehicles, then vehicle lifespan is extended, but route assignment complexity increases due to multiple wear-and-tear factors

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvevehicle lifespanVSAvoidroute assignment complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Duration of action of stationary objectVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces complex manual route assignment processes with an automated computer-based system. The computer determines wear-and-tear ratings by automatically processing multiple factors (electric motor use, battery use, road grade, travel speed) and performs route optimization calculations, thereby reducing the perceived complexity for operators while extending vehicle lifespan.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

4Productivity

If comprehensive wear-and-tear evaluation is performed for route assignment, then vehicle utilization is optimized, but computational requirements increase due to multiple stress factors

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvevehicle utilization efficiencyVSAvoidcomputational requirements
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSPower

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the wear-and-tear evaluation into distinct components: electric motor use evaluation, battery use evaluation, road grade evaluation, and travel speed evaluation. Each component is assessed separately to determine its contribution to overall wear-and-tear, allowing for more efficient computational processing while maintaining comprehensive evaluation for optimized vehicle utilization.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Data Source

PatentUS11981317B2Systems and methods to assign travel routes to alternative energy vehicles
Publication Date: 2024.05.14 FORD GLOBAL TECH LLC
  • US11981317B2 patent drawing
  • US11981317B2 patent drawing
  • US11981317B2 patent drawing

AI summary

The disclosure generally pertains to systems and methods for assigning alternative energy vehicles to travel routes based on vehicle wear-and-tear ratings. Wear-and-tear ratings may be influenced by factors such as, for example, road grade, travel speed, electric motor use, and battery use, on various travel routes. An example method for determining a wear-and-tear rating of an alternative energy vehicle may involve determining an amount of stress imposed upon an electric motor of an alternative energy vehicle due to a grade of a road on a travel route, and an amount of energy consumed from a battery of the alternative energy vehicle due to a speed of travel on the travel route. The wear-and-tear rating of the alternative energy vehicle may then be determined based on the amount of stress imposed upon the electric motor and/or the amount of energy consumed from the battery on the travel route.